Sustainable Building Design With Autodesk Ecotec

Ecole des Mines de Nantes
La Chantrerie
4, rue Alfred Kastler
B.P. 20722 - F-44307 NANTES Cedex 3
KTH
Valhallavgen 79, Stockholm
Kungl Tekniska Hgskolan, SE-100 44
STOCKHOLM
Master Thesis Report
Sustainable Building Design

with Autodesk Ecotect
Le Sommer Environment
5 bis rue des Haudriettes
75003 PARIS
Date: 11/12/10
Raphal BARRY
SEE Master Thesis report

Sustainable building design with Autodesk Ecotect
Summary
Abstract.............................................................................................................................4
Introduction.......................................................................................................................5
Context....................................................................................................................................5
Climate change....................................................................................................................................5
The HQE Scheme...............................................................................................................................5
Le SOMMER Environment.............................................................................................7
The company........................................................................................................................................7
Internship Objectives...........................................................................................................................7
Typical day.............................................................................................................................................7
Case Study......................................................................................................................8
Description.............................................................................................................................8
Visualization Conventions..............................................................................................10
Relationship between the building and its environment..............................11

Climatic interactions.........................................................................................................11
Heliodon..................................................................................................................................................11
Solar potential.....................................................................................................................................15
Impact of nearby buildings............................................................................................................18
Solar protection..................................................................................................................................21
Visual conditions................................................................................................................................24
Energy Management................................................................................................26
Dynamic Thermal Simulation......................................................................................26
Thermal Response...........................................................................................................................26
Hygrothermal comfort...............................................................................................31
Summer overheating .....................................................................................................31
Direct Beam Radiation....................................................................................................................31
Raphal BARRY
Page 2/40

Visual comfort..............................................................................................................34
Natural light .......................................................................................................................34
Daylight access.................................................................................................................................34
Daylight factor....................................................................................................................................36
Discussion and Conclusions.................................................................................39

Capabilities..........................................................................................................................39
Limitations............................................................................................................................40
Conclusion..........................................................................................................................40
Raphal BARRY
Page 3/40

Abstract
In 2002, an environmental assessment scheme was released in France in order to
measure and improve the environmental performances of new and existing buildings: the
High Environmental Quality Scheme (HQE).
Similar to the LEED or BREEAM assessment methods, the HQE Scheme focuses on 14
different environmental themes, such as energy consumption, daylight availability, acoustic
comfort, etc. with objectives such as limitation in energy consumption, minimum daylight
levels, adequate reverberation time, etc.
Due to the complexity of the many scientific phenomena involved, advanced calculation
procedures are required to measure most environmental performances. For instance, the
study of heat transfer through building fabric to determine internal temperature variations
and heating/cooling loads or the computation of daylight levels in a room when a building
is overshadowed by surrounding obstructions is a complicated task that necessitates the
use of computer simulation.
However, if various analysis software are today available, they rarely often the possibility
to study all these effects at once. As a consequence, the most time consuming process
of drawing the geometry of the building and making the right assignments, often needs to
be repeated. This not only leads to a waste of time. It also favors local optimization by
considering sequentially each environmental quantity in spite of strong interactions
between them.
Thus, it was highly desirable to develop a user-friendly and comprehensive software that
could optimize a building's environmental performances at once.
Within the frame of a six months internship at Le SOMMER Environment - a small
Parisian consultancy specialized in building environmental certification - a presentation of
the possibilities offered by one such software: Autodesk Ecotect is given through a simple
housing project case study.
Raphal BARRY
Page 4/40

Introduction
Context
Climate change
In order to tackle the worldwide issue of climate change, the European Union committed
to reduce greenhouse gases emissions through the signature of the Kyoto protocol and
the adoption in December 2008 of a climate energy package aiming at setting a
common energy policy and fight climate change. It should enable to reach by the year
2020 the goal of the three 20s : a reduction by 20% of greenhouse gases emissions,
an improvement of 20% in energy efficiency and a share of 20% renewable energy
sources in the European energy consumption.
For France, the objectives are in agreement with the Kyoto protocol and the climate
energy package aims at dividing by a factor of 4 its greenhouse gases by the end of
2050.
The HQE Scheme

In line with the principles of sustainable development, the French building sector agreed
upon a High Environmental Quality Scheme (HQE).
Born in 1996, the HQE Association entrusted in 2002 to the Centre Scientifique et
Technique du Btiment 1 the mission of establishing a reference guide for the HQE
Scheme certification of tertiary buildings. According to this guide, environmental
performances are assessed via fourteen different environmental themes, grouped in four
families presented page 6.
For each theme is assigned a level of performance among three possibilities:
Base
Performing
Very Performing.
The French Building Scientific Centre
Raphal BARRY
Page 5/40

The 14 environmental themes of the HQE Scheme:
Site and Construction
Theme n1: Relationship between the building and its environment

Theme n2: Materials environmental impacts
Theme n3: Construction site management
Eco managmement
Theme
Theme
Theme
Theme
n4:
n5:
n6:
n7:
Energy management
Water management
Wastes management
Maintenance of environmental performances
Theme
Theme
Theme
Theme
n8: Hygrothermal comfort

n9: Acoustic comfort
n10: Visual comfort
n11 : Odour comfort
Comfort
Health
Theme n12: Spaces health watch

Theme n13: Air quality
Theme n14: Water quality
Raphal BARRY
Page 6/40

Le SOMMER Environment
The company
Founded in 2002 by Michel Le SOMMER, Le SOMMER Environment is a small Parisian
consultancy whose main activity deals with building environmental certification (HQE
Scheme, BREEAM and LEED).
Since its creation the turnover steadily increases by more than 50% each year (700 000
euros in 2008). The company has 9 employees comprising 8 engineers and a secretary.
Internship Objectives
The objective that I was assigned consisted in assessing the software Autodesk Ecotect
on a simple case study while focusing on a certain number of environmental themes of
the HQE Scheme.
Four themes among the 14 presented page 6 were studied:
Theme
Theme
Theme
Theme
n1: Relationship between the building and its environment

n4: Energy Management
n8: Hygrothermal comfort
n10: Visual comfort
Typical day
During my internship, my work mainly consisted in learning how to use properly the
software. Apart from the case study presented in the report, many other simple
examples were thus designed and tested during the first four months to understand
clearly the functionning of Autodesk Ecotect.
The typical work hours were from 9am to 6pm with a 1 hour lunch break, from Monday
till Friday. I was most of the time working in an open space on a desktop computer in
coordination with a team of engineers, except when I had the opportunity to visit
construction sites.
Raphal BARRY
Page 7/40

Case Study
Description
The following case study serves as an example for the illustration of the environmental
objectives addressed by the High Environmental Scheme (llustration 1) and was
specifically developed to test the possibilities of Autodesk Ecotect (Illustration 2).
The project itself is a three people family housing oriented south, composed of a
bedroom, living, kitchen, bathroom, toilets, storage room and a balcony, located in Paris
(48.7N,2.4E).
Balcony
Kitchen
Living
Corridor
Storage
Bathroom
WC
Bedoom
llustration 1: Top View of the project
Raphal BARRY
Page 8/40
Master Thesis report

Illustration 2: 3D Modeling of the project (Autodesk Ecotect)

Visualization Conventions
In the remainder of this text, the apartment studied is located on the 3rd floor of a fictitious
building (it is colored in blue in Illustration 5 and 6).
For simplicity, it is assumed that the 1 st, 2nd and 4th floor apartments are exactly the
same, ie they have exactly the same shape and dimensions (as can be seen in
Illustration 3 and 5).
Illustration 3: Apartments arrangement
For better visualisation purposes, the 3rd floor apartement is sometimes visually isolated
from the other apartments so that it might appear as not having a balcony over itself (as
in the upper picture in Illustration 4 below) though in reality it is always overshadowed by
4th floor apartment balcony.
Illustration 4: Though not alwoays drawn (as in the upper picture), the balcony of the 4 th floor
apartement is always active and taken into consideration in any calculation.
Raphal BARRY
Page 10/40

Relationship between the building and its environment

Climatic interactions
Heliodon
By inserting the project within a building (Illustration 5), and inserting that building in an
urban environment (Illustration 6), exterior climatic conditions relatively to the Sun can be
studied via the help of a heliodon.
A heliodon is a set of pictures taken at certain key dates of the year enabling one to
measure the overshadowing mpacts of nearby buildings. It thus enables one to assess
qualitatively the solar potential of the site.
Illustration 5: 3D Modeling of the building within which the project fits in (Autodesk Ecotect)
Illustration 6: 3D Modeling of the urban environment (Autodesk Ecotect)
Raphal BARRY
Page 11/40

Illustration 7: Heliodon on summer solstice (21 june) for 10h00, 14h00 and 17h00 legal time.

Illustration 8: Same as Illustration 7.

Results Interpretation:
On summer solstice, the heliodon reveals that the building inside which is integrated the
project is impacted by nearby buildings at 10h00. However, it is not impacted nor at
14h00 neither at 17h00.
At 10h00, the ground floor to 3 rd floor housings are totally overshadowed by nearby
buildings. Only the 4th floor housing benefits from direct beam solar radiation, in spite of
the overshadowing of a small part of the balcony.
At 14h00 and 17h00, housings from ground floor to 3 rd floor appear shaded, but that is
due to overshadowing by the building itself due to the balconies. The nearby buildings
play no role in this effect.
Reciprocally, the nearby buildings are impacted by the project and the building inside
which it integrates at 10h00 and 17h00. The impact is however negligible as only a part
of the ground floor of these is affected.
Raphal BARRY
Page 14/40

Solar potential
Whereas a heliodon is a precious tool to determine the impacts of shadows of nearby
buildings or obstructions on the project, it does not yield a quantitative result about the
site solar potential.
That is why, in addition to the visualisation of shadows, it is possible with Autodesk
Ecotect to quantify sunlight hours and exposure of the project surfaces and those of
nearby obstructions
By mapping the results directly on the digital model (Illustration 9 and 10), the site solar
potential can be clearly seen.
Illustration 9: Site solar potential: percentage solar exposure on summer solstice

cumulated from 10h00 to 20h00 legal time.
Raphal BARRY
Page 15/40

Illustration 10: Same as Illustration 9. Project close - up.

The results reveal non uniform solare exposure for the different faades.
The western faade is much more exposed than the eastern faade. It is thus beneficial
to place the living and the bedroom along the western side and keep the kitchen and
sevice rooms on the eastern side.
It can also be noticed that the southern faade is well protected from direct beam solar
radiation, at least on summer solstice, but that the balcony still receives direct solar
radiation and is thus not completely overshadowed to offer a pleasant place to enjoy in
summer.
Raphal BARRY
Page 17/40

Impact of nearby buildings

Urban environment can have a detrimental effect on the development of a project.
Nearby buildings may overshadow surfaces, prevents windows from receiving sunlight,
diminishing solar loads in winter when needed.
Autodesk Ecotect is able to measure the overshadowing effect by calculating the solar
exposure with and without nearby buildings. The difference between the two, expressed
as a percentage reveals the overshadowing effect (Illustration 11 and 12).
Illustration 11: Impacts due to nearby buildings on

summer solstice cumulated from 10h00 to 20h00 legal
time.
Raphal BARRY
Page 18/40

Illustration 12: Same as Illustration 11. Project close - up

The overshadowing caused by nearby buildings from 10h00 to 20h00 on summer
solstice is different for each faade of the project.
For the eastern faade, the kitchen and the bathroom are impacted relatively similarly
with a 11% to 22% cut in cumulated solar exposure which represents a loss of 1 to 2
hours of sunlight.
For the western faade, the corridor and the bedroom are impacted with a cut between
8% and 17% in cumulated solar exposure which represents a loss of 1 to 2 hours of
sulight
For the northern faade, a cut between 14% and 29% in cumulated solar exposure can
be noticed which represents a loss of 1 to 2 hours of sunlight.
Lastly, for the southern faade, solare exposure is lowered for the kitchen due to nearby
buildings. The decrease in solar exposure is comprised between 14% and 25%, which
represents a loss of 1 to 2 hours of sunlight.
It can be noted that the overshadowing effect due to nearby buildings is beneficial in
summer since it lowers direct beam solar radiation and mitigates overheating.
Raphal BARRY
Page 20/40

Solar protection
The problem of overheating due to direct beam solar radiation through windows can be
avoided by means of either fixed or moveable solar shading devices.
In the case of fixed solar shadings, Autodesk Ecotect offers different analysis tools to
determine the optimal shape to intercept direct beam solar radiation over the requested
period of the year.
The profile shown in Illustration 13 et 14 was obtained by means of ray-tracing
techniques.
Illustration 13: Solar shading profile of the southern faade.
Raphal BARRY
Page 21/40

Illustration 14: Ray tracing techniques for the determination of the optimal solar shading profile.

Colours reflects the importance of direct beam solar radiation on summer solstice.
The yellow dots represent the spots exposed the longest time during the day while the
blue dots represent spots that are less exposed.
Raphal BARRY
Page 23/40

Visual conditions
The location of windows being defined, Autodesk Ecotect offers the possibility to map the
spots of the site that can be seen through them (Illustration 15).
The result, expressed as the total visible window area illustrates the spots on which
landscaping is important. Indeed, these spots are those that have the greatest chance to
be seen when the users will look through the windows.
Illustration 15: Mapping of the visible spots from the windows of the project
Raphal BARRY
Page 24/40

The main spots seen from the housing project are represented by means of a volumetric
mapping. Spots in blue colour are less seen than those in red colour.
The main spots of the site to be landscaped are the southern and western part of the
building (this was to be expected as the main openings of the projected are on the
southern faade with the kitchen and the living and on the western faade with the living
and the bedroom).
Raphal BARRY
Page 25/40

Energy Management
Dynamic Thermal Simulation
Thermal Response
In order to analyse the thermal response of the project, a dynamic thermal simulation is
performed by means of the Energy Plus software simulation platform. Indeed, Autodesk
Ecotect can export the geometry of a project and other information into an .idf file that
can be read by Energy Plus1.
The idf file can be further refined in the EnergyPlus Editor if necessary and is finally run
by the EnergyPlus Engine to produce information about the variations of temperature,
heat load, etc within the different rooms of the projects.
The results can then be more easily visualized through Sketchup via the Open Studio
plugin which offers the possibility to load an .idf file and visualize by different colours the
zones temperature variations along the year and other such output variables ()
To run a simulation, several input parameters have to be defined. These refer primarily to
the:
Site and location:
This information determine solar position calculation, and hence incidence angles, but also
outdoor temperatures, solar radiation, wind speed (used for the external convection
coefficient calculation), and other important environmental conditions.
The reference weather data file is taken from the Energy Plus weather file ParisOrly.epw
available at http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/cfm/weather_data.cfm.
The weather values (outdoor dry bulb, beam and diffuse solar radiation, etc) are
considered to reflect that of a typical meteorological year. The outdoor drybulb
temperature recordings are obtained in such conditions that the effect of Sunlight is
substracted (temperature sensors are placed in a vented shelter at the meteorological
1
Ecotect can also export .gbm files that can be read by the software IES Virtual Environment. However,
Energy Plus was prefered to IES for the reason that it is a free software.
Raphal BARRY
Page 26/40

station site). In addition, the given temperature curves exhibit the daily average
temperature, not the hourly average, which is why the values appearing in the simulation
results graph may seem lower than expected.
The site location is 48.73 North and 2.40 East. This location refers to a suburb of Paris
where the outdoor temperatures are usually lower than that which would be observed in
the city centre of Paris.
Nearby overshadowing objects
Nearby buildings primarily affect solar loads on the various faades of a project and
hence contribute to the thermal response of a project.
In the simulation which is run, the effect of nearby buildings is studied. Hence two different
temperature curves family are derived, the first one corresponding to a reference case
without nearby buildings and the second one including them. Solar absorptivity of nearby
buildings is assumed to be 40%.
Constructing Materials
Constructing materials determine the thermal response of a project. Their thermophysical

properties indicate their ability to conduct heat and store it. Materials with a low
conductivity such as wood will poorly transfer heat while material with a low volumetric
heat capacity will get warm more quickly than those having a high volumetric heat
capacity and hence will not serve as good thermal storage materials.
Constructing materials also influence thermal comfort. Their inner surface temperature, in
conjunction with the indoor air temperature, determine the mean radiant temperature. For
a same sensation of 20C, a decrease in the indoor air temperature can be
conterbalanced by an increase of the walls inner surface temperature.
In the following simulation, external walls are assumed to be made of brick (20cm width)
with external insulation (10cm width) and siding (2cm) of following thermophysical
properties:
Brick: Thermal conductivity of 0,72 W/(m.K), Specific heat of 835 J/(kg.K), Density 1920
kg/m. Emissivity of 0,93 (assumed equal to thermal absorptivity), Solar absorptivity of
0,6.
Raphal BARRY
Page 27/40

Insulation: Thermal conductivity of 0,042 W/(m.K), Specific heat of 1670 J/(kg.K), Density
120 kg/m.
Siding: Same thermophysical properties as that of brick.
Windows are assumed to be made of 4-16-4 air filled double pane glazing of following
properties: g value of 58% and U value of 1,4 W/(mK). Internal walls are assumed to be
made of brick only (10cm width).
Building activity (occupants, etc).
Occupants, lighting and electric equipments release heat to the zone to which they
belong. For instance, light energy is partly absorbed and partly reflected by surrounding
surfaces which has the effect of increasing their surface temperature.
No internal gain is taken into account in the simulation. In addition, heat gains/losses due
to infiltration of outdoor air is set to zero, ie the apartment is perfectly air tight.
Solar shading devices
As with nearby buildings, solar shading devices influence solar loads on the faades of
the projet. They are usally used in front of windows to prevent solar overheating in
summer.
In the simulation which is run, the effect of solar shading devices is studied. Hence two
different temperature curves family are derived, the first one corresponding to a reference
case without shading devices and the second one including shading devices. Solar
absorptivity of the shading devices is assumed to be 40%.
The following results of the simulation present the temperature variations in three different
rooms (bedroom, living and kitchen) for a full year.
Raphal BARRY
Page 28/40

Temperature Variations
Effect of Nearby Buildings
50
40
Temperature (in C)
30
20
10
0
02/01
01/01
04/01
03/01
06/01
05/01
08/01
07/01
10/01
09/01
-10
Time
Outdoor Drybulb
Bedroom Unshaded
Bedroom w. Buildings
Kitchen Unshaded
Kitchen w. Buildings
Living Unshaded
Living w. Buildings
Illustration 16: Thermal Response Shading devices off and nearby buildings on
12/01
11/01

Nearby buildings slightly influence the thermal response of the building.
The peak temperature observed in the unshaded situation (solar shading devices off,
nearby buildings off) occurs on the 24th of August in the living (42,2C) for an outdoor
temperature of 20C.
The temperature observed the same day in the same zone but with nearby buildings on
is reduced to 39,5C, which represents a 2,7C decrease.
The temperature difference between the unshaded situation and the situation where
nearby buildings are present is more pronounced in summer than in winter. For the living,
on the 24th of August, it is 2,7C, while on the 15th of November, it is only 0,5C.
The average temperature difference for the bedroom, kitchen and living are all equal to
about 1,5C.
Raphal BARRY
Page 30/40

Hygrothermal comfort
Summer overheating
Direct Beam Radiation
The temperatures observed within the three different zones analysed show that very high
temperatures are achieved in summer, even though the outdoor temperature is not
significantly high.
This result is essentially due to the penetration of direct beam solar radiation into these
zones. Since the apartment is assumed perfectly air tight, no air exchange is possible
between the indoor and the outdoor air which is why temperatures as high as 42,2C on
the 24th of August can occur.
The use of solar shading devices is thus essential in summer to block direct beam solar
radiation. The inclusion of such devices, as modeled in the Solar protection paragraph,
page 21, combined with the effect of nearby buildings would produce the results given
next page (Illustration 17).
Raphal BARRY
Page 31/40

Temperature Variations
Cumulated effect: solar shading devices and nearby buildings
50
40
Temperature (in C)
30
20
10
0
02/01
01/01
04/01
03/01
06/01
05/01
08/01
07/01
10/01
09/01
-10
Time
Outdoor Drybulb
Bedroom Unshaded
Bedroom Shaded
Kitchen Unshaded
Kitchen Shaded
Living Unshaded
Living Shaded
Illustration 17: Thermal Response Shading devices on and nearby buildings on
12/01
11/01

The combined effect of solar shading devices and nearby buildings significantly reduce
solar gains and therefore decrease the indoor temperature of the three different zones
analysed.
As previously observed, the peak temperature observed without any protection occurs
on the 24th of August in the living (42,2C) for an outdoor temperature of 20C while the
temperature observed the same day in the same zone but with shading devices on and
nearby buildings on is reduced to 26,5C, which represents a 15,7C decrease.
The temperature difference between the unshaded situation and the situation with
shading devices on and nearby buildings on is again more pronounced in summer than in
winter. For the living, on the 24th of August, it is 15,7C, while on the 15 th of November, it
is only 3,2C, which reflects the fact that solar shading devices were designed to block
direct beam solar radiation in summer.
The average temperature difference for the bedroom, kitchen an living are equal
respectively to 6,2C, 7,1C and 7,4C.
These theoretical results would not however reflect the real world thermal behaviour of
the apartment, given the air-tightness assumption.
In reality, the appartment would exchange air with the outdoors through both infiltration
and ventilation (opening of windows) and such important temperature differences would
therefore probably not be recorded.
Raphal BARRY
Page 33/40

Visual comfort
Natural light
Daylight access
The fraction of spaces having access to daylight can be easily computed via Autodesk
Ecotect.
In addition, it is possible to determine which spaces have a better access to views on the
outside by mapping the area of visible windows (Illustration 18).
Illustration 18: Access to views on the outside, 1m - isolines
Raphal BARRY
Page 34/40

As expected, one can observe that the living benefits from a satisfying access to exterior
views. It has an average view on 8.5m of openings, while the bedroom has only 3,5m
and the kitchen 3m.
Raphal BARRY
Page 35/40

Daylight factor
The daylight factor (Illustration 19 and 20) represents the nondimensional ratio between
the quantity of natural light transmitted in a space and the quantity of exterior available
light under overcast sky conditions. It gives a measure of the worst case natural lighting
levels in a space, and enables one to assess the visual comfort performances of a
project.
The computation of the daylight factor is executed in the Radiance module 1 based on
ray- tracing techniques. It requires material visible reflexion factors (floor/wall/ceiling) as
well as windows visible transmissivity2.
Illustration 19: Computation of the daylight factor

1
http://radsite.lbl.gov/deskrad
2 Standard hypothesis for these factors are 15%, 60% and 80% for visible reflexivities of floor, wall and ceiling
and 80% visible transmissivity for windows.
Raphal BARRY
Page 36/40

Illustration 20: Computation of the daylight factor with (left) and without (right) shading devices

The average daylight factor without shading devices is 3.33%. Hence, under overcast
sky conditions, assuming a design sky illuminance of 5000 lux, the average natural light
level in the housing is 167 lux which is quite satisfying. Of course, the natural light level is
not uniform in space, and some rooms, such as the living, have higher lighting levels than
others.
With shading devices on, the average daylight factor diminishes to 1.69%. This represents
a significant decrease of about 50% from the previous state and clearly highlights the
problem of optimizing daylight levels in summer while preventing overheating. Average
daylighting levels are worth 85 lux, which corresponds to a dark atmosphere.
Raphal BARRY
Page 38/40

Discussion and Conclusions

Capabilities
Throughout a housing case study, three of the 14 environmental themes from the High
Environmental Scheme were illustrated through Autodesk Ecotect.
Concerning the relationship between the building and its environment, the software offers
various possibilities to study solar interactions. It can indeed produce heliodons and map
the sunlight hours over any surface directly onto a 3D digital model thus making it
possible to study solar potential and overshadowing effects due to nearby buildings.
In addition, tools are available to define the optimal shading profile to block direct beam
solar radiation for specific periods so as to prevent overheatings in summer. These results
can be mapped once again directly onto the model for clarity.
Autodesk also offers possibilities to analyse thermal interactions between a building and
its environment via the Energy Plus platform. The efficiency of previously designed solar
shadings can be assessed through the calculation of transmitted radiation and internal
temperature variations.
Lastly, the software can analyse access to views to the outside and produce daylight
illuminance results by computing the daylight factor through the Radiance module. The
daylight factor is of critical importance since it represents the worst case natural light
levels scenario giving an indication on the ability of a room to be naturally lit throughout
the year.
The process of optimizing environmental performances thus become greatly facilitated
since only one single digital model of the project needs to be drawn. By mapping
calculation results onto it, it becomes very easy to visualise any type of effect, saving a
lot of time.
In order to optimize simultaneaously environmental performances, sensitivity analysis can
be performed by modifying hypothesis and testing different scenarios. In this way, to
prevent overheating in summer while keeping sufficient natural light levels, the optical
properties of windows and shadings such as visible and solar transmissivities can be
Raphal BARRY
Page 39/40

modified to reach satisfying trade-offs.
Limitations
In spite of its many capabilities, Autodesk Ecotect also has limitations.
The first limitation is probably due to the conditions under which results are obtained.
Indeed, model geometry quickly becomes very complex - thousands of vertices is not
uncommon so that tradeoffs have to be made between speed and accuracy. Though
Autodesk Ecotect offers the possibility to favor one to the detriment of the other, results
should always be carefully analysed before doing any interpretation and one should
clearly understand the assumptions used before doing any calculation. Otherwise,
Autodesk Ecotect may give totally erroneous results.
Secondly, like most software of its kind, Autodesk Ecotect still suffers from unstability
which frequently leads to unwanted program termination. The visualisation panel relying
on the Open GL interface may become corrupted from time to time, though the issue
was adressed many times to the developpers.
Other limitations include the absence of tools to assess water management
performances. Though the HQE Scheme adresses issues such as rainwater collection or
watertightness, Autodesk Ecotect has today no capability in this field.
Conclusion
In spite of such limitations, Autodesk Ecotect is certainly a very powerful tool that can
help assess at least three of the HQE Scheme environmental themes.
Due to lack of time, themes such as Acoustic comfort or Energy Management could not
be treated. However, Autodesk Ecotect also offers adapted analysis tools to treat these
issues.
In my opinion, the many capabilities of the software associated with its user-friendliness
make it an essential tool in sustainaible building design. Though it is hoped that the next
versions will integrate new capabilities, and improve stability, it is already a very complete
software.
Raphal BARRY
Page 40/40

Sustainable Building Design With Autodesk Ecotec

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sustainable Building Design With Autodesk Ecotec

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Ecole des Mines de Nantes

Master Thesis Report

Sustainable Building Design

SEE Master Thesis report

Relationship between the building and its environment..............................11

SEE Master Thesis report

Discussion and Conclusions.................................................................................39

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

The HQE Scheme

The French Building Scientific Centre

SEE Master Thesis report

The 14 environmental themes of the HQE Scheme:

Site and Construction

Theme n1: Relationship between the building and its environment

n8: Hygrothermal comfort

Theme n12: Spaces health watch

SEE Master Thesis report

n1: Relationship between the building and its environment

SEE Master Thesis report

llustration 1: Top View of the project

Master Thesis report

Illustration 2: 3D Modeling of the project (Autodesk Ecotect)

SEE Master Thesis report

Illustration 3: Apartments arrangement

SEE Master Thesis report

Relationship between the building and its environment

Illustration 6: 3D Modeling of the urban environment (Autodesk Ecotect)

Master Thesis report

Master Thesis report

Illustration 8: Same as Illustration 7.

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

Illustration 9: Site solar potential: percentage solar exposure on summer solstice

Master Thesis report

Illustration 10: Same as Illustration 9. Project close - up.

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

Impact of nearby buildings

Illustration 11: Impacts due to nearby buildings on

Master Thesis report

Illustration 12: Same as Illustration 11. Project close - up

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

Illustration 13: Solar shading profile of the southern faade.

Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

Site and location:

SEE Master Thesis report

Nearby overshadowing objects

Constructing materials determine the thermal response of a project. Their thermophysical

SEE Master Thesis report

Building activity (occupants, etc).

Solar shading devices

Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

SEE Master Thesis report

Master Thesis report

Illustration 17: Thermal Response Shading devices on and nearby buildings on